agentleFS
rommelporrasrommelporras/kiro-config/skills/dispatching-parallel-agents/SKILL.md

dispatching-parallel-agents

Skill13 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub

Use when facing 2+ independent tasks that can be worked on without shared state or sequential dependencies

189 other projects use a version of this, 162 of them edited.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use chinese-code-review, chinese-commit-conventions and 10 more.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • Leodorareluctant259Skill

    chinese-code-review

    中文代码审查规范——在保持专业严谨的同时,用符合国内团队文化的方式给出有效反馈

    Also in 8 projects that use this

  • Leodorareluctant259Skill

    chinese-commit-conventions

    中文 Git 提交规范 — 适配国内团队的 commit message 规范和 changelog 自动化

    Also in 8 projects that use this

  • obraSkill

    diagnosing-superpowers

    Use when a superpowers session went wrong and your human partner wants to know why — repeated work, ignored plans, stumbles, poor results, a skill that didn't fire, "it took too long", "why is it so expensive", "what is it doing" — or wants to build a bug report for the superpowers maintainers, for the current session or a past one identified by id or path, on any harness.

    Also in 19 projects that use this

  • kntismSkill

    condition-based-waiting

    Use when tests have race conditions, timing dependencies, or inconsistent pass/fail behavior - replaces arbitrary timeouts with condition polling to wait for actual state changes, eliminating flaky tests from timing guesses

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • xfstudioSkill

    context-driven-development

    Use this skill when working with Conductor's context-driven

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • EvezArtSkill

    analytics-dashboard

    User behavior tracking and analytics dashboards

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • +3 more from Leodorareluctant259

The file

Show its rules and text

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

13 rules. 8 are common, 5 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 8

    Common

    Most of the 179 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 5

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Common:

    When you have multiple unrelated failures (different test files, different subsystems, different bugs), investigating them sequentially …

    line 12
  2. Common:

    No shared state between investigations

    line 40
  3. Distinctive:

    Before dispatching, scan the task list for operations subagents can't perform:

    line 48
  4. Common:

    Constraints: Don't change other code

    line 70
  5. Distinctive:

    Use the delegate tool to launch all tasks concurrently:

    line 75
  6. Distinctive:

    All three run concurrently.

    line 83
  7. Common:

    Verify fixes don't conflict

    line 89
  8. Common:

    Run full test suite

    line 90
  9. Common:

    Self-contained: - All context needed to understand the problem

    line 97
  10. Common:

    Integration: All fixes independent, no conflicts, full suite green

    line 165
  11. Common:

    Run full suite: - Verify all fixes work together

    line 181
  12. Distinctive:

    All investigations completed concurrently

    line 189
  13. Distinctive:

    All fixes integrated successfully

    line 190

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 179 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Dispatching Parallel Agents

Overview

You delegate tasks to specialized agents with isolated context. By precisely crafting their instructions and context, you ensure they stay focused and succeed at their task. They should never inherit your session's context or history — you construct exactly what they need. This also preserves your own context for coordination work.

When you have multiple unrelated failures (different test files, different subsystems, different bugs), investigating them sequentially wastes time. Each investigation is independent and can happen in parallel.

Core principle: Dispatch one delegate per independent problem domain. Let them work concurrently.

When to Use

digraph when_to_use {
    "Multiple failures?" [shape=diamond];
    "Are they independent?" [shape=diamond];
    "Single delegate investigates all" [shape=box];
    "One delegate per problem domain" [shape=box];
    "Can they work in parallel?" [shape=diamond];
    "Sequential delegates" [shape=box];
    "Parallel dispatch" [shape=box];

    "Multiple failures?" -> "Are they independent?" [label="yes"];
    "Are they independent?" -> "Single delegate investigates all" [label="no - related"];
    "Are they independent?" -> "Can they work in parallel?" [label="yes"];
    "Can they work in parallel?" -> "Parallel dispatch" [label="yes"];
    "Can they work in parallel?" -> "Sequential delegates" [label="no - shared state"];
}

Use when:

  • 3+ test files failing with different root causes
  • Multiple subsystems broken independently
  • Each problem can be understood without context from others
  • No shared state between investigations

Don't use when:

  • Failures are related (fix one might fix others)
  • Need to understand full system state
  • Delegates would interfere with each other

Pre-dispatch checklist: Before dispatching, scan the task list for operations subagents can't perform:

  • File deletions → handle with git rm yourself
  • Web search / AWS CLI calls → gather data yourself, include in briefing
  • grep / glob searches → run yourself, pass results to subagent Extract these into a pre-dispatch step. Then dispatch the remaining tasks.

The Pattern

1. Identify Independent Domains

Group failures by what's broken:

  • File A tests: Tool approval flow
  • File B tests: Batch completion behavior
  • File C tests: Abort functionality

Each domain is independent - fixing tool approval doesn't affect abort tests.

2. Create Focused Delegate Tasks

Each delegate gets:

  • Specific scope: One test file or subsystem
  • Clear goal: Make these tests pass
  • Constraints: Don't change other code
  • Expected output: Summary of what you found and fixed

3. Dispatch in Parallel

Use the delegate tool to launch all tasks concurrently:

Delegate 1 → "Fix agent-tool-abort.test.ts failures"
Delegate 2 → "Fix batch-completion-behavior.test.ts failures"
Delegate 3 → "Fix tool-approval-race-conditions.test.ts failures"

All three run concurrently.

4. Review and Integrate

When delegates return:

  • Read each summary
  • Verify fixes don't conflict
  • Run full test suite
  • Integrate all changes

Delegate Prompt Structure

Good delegate prompts are:

  1. Focused - One clear problem domain
  2. Self-contained - All context needed to understand the problem
  3. Specific about output - What should the delegate return?
Fix the 3 failing tests in src/agents/agent-tool-abort.test.ts:

1. "should abort tool with partial output capture" - expects 'interrupted at' in message
2. "should handle mixed completed and aborted tools" - fast tool aborted instead of completed
3. "should properly track pendingToolCount" - expects 3 results but gets 0

These are timing/race condition issues. Your task:

1. Read the test file and understand what each test verifies
2. Identify root cause - timing issues or actual bugs?
3. Fix by:
   - Replacing arbitrary timeouts with event-based waiting
   - Fixing bugs in abort implementation if found
   - Adjusting test expectations if testing changed behavior

Do NOT just increase timeouts - find the real issue.

Return: Summary of what you found and what you fixed.

Common Mistakes

Too broad: "Fix all the tests" - delegate gets lost Specific: "Fix agent-tool-abort.test.ts" - focused scope

No context: "Fix the race condition" - delegate doesn't know where Context: Paste the error messages and test names

No constraints: Delegate might refactor everything Constraints: "Do NOT change production code" or "Fix tests only"

Vague output: "Fix it" - you don't know what changed Specific: "Return summary of root cause and changes"

When NOT to Use

Related failures: Fixing one might fix others - investigate together first Need full context: Understanding requires seeing entire system Exploratory debugging: You don't know what's broken yet Shared state: Delegates would interfere (editing same files, using same resources)

Real Example from Session

Scenario: 6 test failures across 3 files after major refactoring

Failures:

  • agent-tool-abort.test.ts: 3 failures (timing issues)
  • batch-completion-behavior.test.ts: 2 failures (tools not executing)
  • tool-approval-race-conditions.test.ts: 1 failure (execution count = 0)

Decision: Independent domains - abort logic separate from batch completion separate from race conditions

Dispatch:

Delegate 1 → Fix agent-tool-abort.test.ts
Delegate 2 → Fix batch-completion-behavior.test.ts
Delegate 3 → Fix tool-approval-race-conditions.test.ts

Results:

  • Delegate 1: Replaced timeouts with event-based waiting
  • Delegate 2: Fixed event structure bug (threadId in wrong place)
  • Delegate 3: Added wait for async tool execution to complete

Integration: All fixes independent, no conflicts, full suite green

Time saved: 3 problems solved in parallel vs sequentially

Key Benefits

  1. Parallelization - Multiple investigations happen simultaneously
  2. Focus - Each delegate has narrow scope, less context to track
  3. Independence - Delegates don't interfere with each other
  4. Speed - 3 problems solved in time of 1

Verification

After delegates return:

  1. Review each summary - Understand what changed
  2. Check for conflicts - Did delegates edit same code?
  3. Run full suite - Verify all fixes work together
  4. Spot check - Delegates can make systematic errors

Real-World Impact

From debugging sessions:

  • 6 failures across 3 files
  • 3 delegates dispatched in parallel
  • All investigations completed concurrently
  • All fixes integrated successfully
  • Zero conflicts between delegate changes

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.